ARkits : architectural robotics kits

ARkits: Architectural Robotics kits

ARCHIVES

JUN 12 2015

LIBRARIES

Submitted to the Program in Media Arts and Sciences, School of Architecture and Planning, on May 8, 2015 in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN MEDIA ARTS AND SCIENCES

at the

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

June 2015

@2015. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. All rights reserved.

Sianature redacted

Certified by: ...

A

Accepted by: ...

Program in Media Arts

Signature redacted

...

Principal Research Scientist

ignature redacted

Prof. Pattie Maes Academic Head

ARkits: Architectural Robotics kits

Hasier Larrea-Tamayo

Submitted to the Program in Media Arts and Sciences, School of Architecture and Planning,

in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Science in Media Arts and Sciences

ABSTRACT

Urban space is too valuable to be static and unresponsive. Our cities are in urgent need of new architectural solutions that maximize space efficiency and respond to the complexities of life.

What if the traditionally passive spatial elements, that give shape to our architectural spaces, could become dynamic and connected?What if furniture

could have superpowers?

In this thesis we explore a future where desks can robotically move and transform, walls can be customized and serve as a hardware platform to integrate state of the art sensor technologies, beds can become a smart home hub, closets can communicate and support new functionalities, spatial elements are finally part of the Internet of Things and the home, the office, the hotel room becomes programmable. A new generation of architectural spaces is envisioned, in which heavy furniture is moved as if it was weightless and new functionalities can be programmed with downloadable apps.

In order to make this vision a reality, a new engineering toolkit is proposed, a kit of parts that allow architects and designers to create this kind of multifunctional and responsive spaces. ARkits present the framework for a new robotic genre: a hardware-software platform and modular system to create a scalable strategy for a new generation of spaces that are efficient, experiential and fun.

ARkits: Architectural Robotics kits

Hasier Larrea-Tamayo

The following people served as readers for this thesis:

Signature redacted

Sic

g

Signature redacted

Nicholas Negroponte

Professor of Media Arts and Sciences

nature redacted

Pattie Maes reyfoos Professor of Media Technology

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It's been quite a ride.

A billion thanks to Kent, for giving me the opportunity of my life.

Thanks to my all-star team, for making the impossible possible. I look forward to keep making great things with you. Luis, Carlos, Ivan, Chad, Eric, Spencer, Yousif, Daniel, Dennis, Dalitso, Phillip and all my past urops and teammates, Oier, Carlos 0...

Thanks to Fundaci6n La Caixa for supporting all of this work.

Thanks to all those other colleagues that helped me grow: Ling Yi, Will, Ryan, Joost and a long etcetera.

Thanks to everyone that, one way or the other, played a part in this story: thesis readers, Media Lab friends, fablab managers, facilities, academic officers... Thanks to Nicholas for challenging every single assumption I made.

And of course, to the people I always wanna make the most proud:

Aita eta Ama. Eli, Elene, Iker eta Horacio. Amatxi. Xabier, Ane eta datozenak. Adriana.

"La dicha en la vida es tener algo que hacer, algo que esperar

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT 3

CITIES AND URBAN SPACE 15

1.1. BEYOND SMART CITIES 16

1.2. THE CHALLENGE OF URBAN SPACE 20

1.3. ROADMAP TO THESIS 27

DESIGNING SPACES OF THE FUTURE THE OLD WAY 29

2.1. DESIGN, ARCHITECTURE AND THE HOME OF THE FUTURE 30

2.2. TECHNOLOGY AND THE HOME OF THE FUTURE 39

ARCHITECTURAL ROBOTICS 43

3.1. ROBOTIG TRANSFORMATION 46

3.2. CUSTOMIZATION 50

3.3. SMART HUB 54

3.4. PROGRAMMABILITY 60

3.5. CASE STUDY: CITYHOME 200 SQ. FT. PROTOTYPE 62

ARKITS: ARCHITECTURAL ROBOTICS KITS 71

4.1. A ROBOTIC TOOLKIT TO DEPLOY AT SCALE 71

4.2. THEORY: SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE 75

4.3. PRACTICE: TRANSLATION 87

DESIGNING SPACES OF THE FUTURE THE NEW WAY 95

5.1. HOMES 96

5.2. OFFICE 105

5.3. OTHERS 110

CONCLUSION 113

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Collage picture of Earth at Night (Image:NASA) [2] 15

Figure 2: Comparison between a Paris Cafe in 1920 (National Geographic [4])

and a road in India 2000's (Knaphill.org [5]) 18

Figure 3: CityScience urban systems summary poster (photo by Kent Larson) 19 Figure 4: "What's In" 350 sq.ft apartment shown as an example of this approach

[15] 30

Figure 5: Ikea's showroom as another example of the same approach (photo

from inhabitat.com) [16] 31

Figure 6: Plan of the Rietveld Schroder House [17] 32

Figure 7: Gary Chang's apartment [18] 33

Figure 8: Gary Chang's 24 rooms in 1 (photo from studyblue.com) [18] 33

Figure 9: Life Edited Apartment in New York with Resource Furniture (photo

courtesy of LifeEdited) [19] 34

Figure 10: Bedaway bed showcasing a counterweighted bed (photo courtesy of

Bedaway) [21] 35

Figure 11: Bruynzeel office solutions showcasing a moving wall system (photo

courtesy of Bruynzeel) [22] 36

Figure 12: YoHome apartment, UK, showcasing a mechatronic bed (photo

courtesy of YoHome) [23] 37

Figure 13: Liftbed commercial bed installed with heavy-duty mechanical columns

(photo courtesy of LiftBed) [24] 38

Figure 14: Monsanto House of the Future at Disneyland [25] 39

Figure 15: Microsoft Home of the Future [26] 40

Figure 16: SmartThings smart hub and app [29] 41

Figure 17: Phillips Hue [31] and Nest Thermostat as examples of smart products

[32] 42

Figure 18: Standard Chassis and Smart Infill (Changing Places Group) 44

Figure 20: Robowall 2nd generation prototype (Changing Places) 48

Figure 21: force sensitive resistor based pressure interface (Zbode Systems)

integrated in Robowall 49

Figure 22: Home Genome Project showing a user profile translated into a spatial

configuration (Dan Smithwick - left, Kent Larson -right)[34] 50

Figure 23: Home Genome Project building blocks showing configuration

Figure 25: Furniture personalization approach where a user profile is translated into a furniture design (Profile images by D. Smithwick, furniture study by P.

Ewing) 53

Figure 26: PlaceLab instrumented apartment (photo by Kent Larson) 55

Figure 27: PlaceLab's custom cabinetry integrating sensors (photo by Kent

Larson) 56

Figure 28: BoxLab implementation in a conventional home (photo & design by J.

Nawyn) [35] 57

Figure 29: BoxLab kiosks deployed in a conventional home. Numbers show

locations. (photo & design by J. Nawyn) [35] 58

Figure 30: From the BoxLab to the FurnitureLab; how the intelligence could move from "boxes" to furniture (Image courtesy of Changing Places) 59

Figure 31: Smart phone app ecosysystem symbolic visualization (Image from

desk.com) [37] 60

Figure 32: Home small scale mock up where gestures where first explored (photo

by H. Larrea) 61

Figure 34: CityHome dining configuration (photo MIT Media Lab) 64

Figure 35: CityHome office configuration (photo MIT Media Lab) 65

Figure 36: CityHome bedroom configuration (photo MIT Media Lab) 66

Figure 37: CityHome bathing configuration (photo MIT Media Lab) 67

Figure 39: Customization options of the 200 sq. ft. CityHome furniture element

(rendering by P. Ewing) 68

Figure 41: Pressure sensors to control transformation integrated into furniture

(photo by MIT Media Lab) 69

Figure 42: Everywhere interface created by a pan/tilt projector on the ceiling that

projects dynamic interfaces on demand (photo by MIT Media Lab) 70

Figure 43: Lego Mindstorms catalog as shown in their website [39] 72

Figure 44: LittleBits components as shown in their website [42] 73

Figure 45: From Lego Robots to Architectural Robots - pictures of prototypes built during 2011-2014 (photos courtesy of MIT Media Lab and Zbode Systems)

74 Figure 46: ARkits blocks, inspired by the Lego Mindstorms system architecture,

showing the different functionality layers 75

Figure 47: ARkits detailed system architecture showing the current breakdown of

components 76

Figure 48: ARkits detailed system architecture as a base for creating the different blocks. Different colors show how components group in the different functionality

Figure 49: Basic mechanical blocks providing the different movement possibilities

78

Figure 50: a 1 bedroom "home made of translations" showing the different positions of closets, bed, cabinets, tables... (photo courtesy of H. Larrea and

Zbode Systems) 79

Figure 51: Drive modules on the 2nd robowall (see chapter 3.1. of this thesis)_ 80 Figure 52: Robocouch being powered by the drive modules shown above 80

Figure 53: Sketch of the ceiling deployment mechanical system concept 81

Figure 54: Prior drop down table prototype being deployed from the ceiling using an electronic interface inspired by a manual string interface (photo courtesy of

Zbode Systems) [44] 82

Figure 55: Grove i/o blocks as an example of input/output peripheral blocks as

shown on their website [45] 83

Figure 56: Brain block architecture schematic 85

Figure 57: Translation robot version 1 as built in January 2015 89

Figure 58: Translation robot version 3 as built in March 2015 90

Figure 59: 1st generation brain block as built in March 2015 (photo by C. Bean)

91

Figure 60: Computing master - on the left - and brain block - on the right (diagram

by C. Rubio) 92

Figure 61: API system architecture divided in functionality blocks (diagram by C.

Rubio) 93

Figure 62: CityHome and CityOff ice versions (renderings by K. Larson and

CityScience 2014 workshop team) 95

Figure 63: 300, 450, 590 and 670 sq. ft empty chassis 96

Figure 64: 300 sq.ft. concept featuring a dropdown bed and table 97

Figure 65: 450 sq. ft. concept featuring a drop down table, bed and robowall__ 97 Figure 66: 670 sq. ft. concept featuring two drop down beds, a drop down table

and two robowalls 98

Figure 67: Rendering of the 670 sq. ft. apartment's living room with a specific

material choice (rendering by K. Larson, Zbode Systems) 98

Figure 68: 300 sq. ft. CityHome featuring dropdown bed, table and moving closet

(plans by L. Alonso) 99

Figure 69: User moving the bed up with the touch interface. Two translation

robots can be seen mounted to the wall 100

Figure 70: User moving the closet with the touch interface and creating a walk in

Figure 72: 400 sq. ft. CityHome showing the different possible space

configurations (plans by P. Ewing) 103

Figure 73: NodeRed interface showing the different nodes used for programming

(photo by C. Rubio) 104

Figure 74: CityOffice concept renderings showing different possible

configurations (renderings by K. Kitayama, J. Pace, R. Simlai) [47] 106

Figure 75: Translation robowall integrating additional internal transformations

(rendering by J. Pace, J. Hamman) [47] 107

Figure 76: Schematic of the family of navigation robots (renderings by J.

Hamman) [47] 107

Figure 77: Sketch of ceiling deployed room separators (renderings by J. Pace, J.

Hamman) [47] 108

Figure 78: CityOffice prototype showcasing the different types of mechanical

movements [47] 108

Figure 79: CityOffice configurations as built in December 2014 [48] 109

Figure 80: Hospital kubo showing the different transformation to adapt to different

uses (renderings by L. Alonso) 110

Figure 81: 300 sq.ft conventional (left) VS transformable hotel room (right)

featuring drop down bed and table 111

Figure 82: CruiseLiner ARkits study showing the different possible configurations

CHAPTER 1

CITIES AND URBAN SPACE

The planet is undergoing a period of extreme urbanization. Perhaps the greatest challenge of our era is to create livable, hyper-efficient, creative cities.

Cities in the future must respond to evolving demographics, limited resources, climate change, globalization, and new patterns of work and entrepreneurship. The City Science Initiative at the MIT Media Lab (Kent Larson et al.) is committed to the proposition that "the human experience and economic vitality of cities can be improved while dramatically reducing resource consumption. The challenge of extreme urbanization can be met through the integrated application of next-generation design strategies, innovative technology, creative engagement with

industry, and enlightened public policy" [1].

1.1. BEYOND SMART CITIES

This thesis builds on top of the "Beyond Smart Cities" vision by the CityScience Initiative at the MIT Media Lab.

From urban optimization to urban disruption.

The following excerpt from the Beyond Smart Cities Seminar at MIT, led by Kent Larson and Ryan Chin [3], summarizes the idea that optimization approaches are not sufficient to tackle some of the biggest societal challenges the world is facing.

"Current Smart City approaches are a game of optimization. Today, academic research and industrial applications in the area of Smart Cities seek to optimize existing city infrastructure, networks, and urban behavior through the deployment and utilization of digital networks. Cities that employ optimization techniques have reported improvements in energy efficiency, water use, public safety, road congestion, and many other areas. However, optimization has its limits. For instance, the improvement of traffic flow in most cities can approach 10% based on current Smart Cities approaches such as sensing the road network, predicting the demand, and controlling traffic signaling. Research and investments in new urban systems are fundamentally critical because optimization will have little effect for rapidly urbanizing cities such as Bangalore, India, which experience around the clock congestion. We can move beyond Smart Cities by focusing on disruptive innovations in technology, design, planning, policy, and strategies that can bring dramatic improvements in urban livability and sustainability".

A city for people, not for machines.

The current methods of city design date back to the 17th century, when engineers and city planners developed centralized networks to deliver drinking water, food, and energy. Similarly structured centralized networks were designed to facilitate transportation and remove waste.

These infrastructure-heavy solutions, however, are becoming increasingly obsolete. Modern cities designed around the private automobile, with single-function zoning, are becoming more congested, polluted, and unsafe. Citizens are spending more of their valuable time commuting, and communities are becoming increasingly detached. Many modern cities simply do not function properly.

"Rather than separate systems by function - water, food, waste, transport, education, energy - we must consider them holistically. Instead of focusing only on access and distribution systems, our cities need dynamic, networked, self-regulating systems that take into account complex interactions. In short, to ensure a sustainable future society, we must deploy emerging technologies to create a nervous system for cities that supports the stability of their government, energy, mobility, work, and public health networks." [4]

Compact, diverse, walkable and attractive cities are a luxury, but they should not be. The City Science Initiative at the MIT Media Lab is exploring methodologies and technology to facilitate the creation of desirable urban features, such as shared electric vehicles, adaptable living environments, and flexible work spaces.

"Our goal is to design urban cells that are compact enough to be walkable and foster casual interactions, without sacrificing connectivity to their larger urban surroundings. These cells must be sufficiently autonomous and provide resiliency, consistent functionality, and elegant urban design. Most importantly, the cellular city must be highly adaptable so it can respond dynamically to changes in the structure of its economic and social activities. "[4]

Figure 2: Comparison between a Paris Cafe in 1920 (National Geographic [4]) and a road in India 2000's (Knaphill.org [5])

High performance, entrepreneurial, livable urban districts.

At the CityScience Initiative, we ask ourselves the following question: What enables high performance, entrepreneurial, livable urban districts?

In order to achieve 1) reduced resource consumption per person, 2) jobs, creative interactions, innovations and 3) quality of life and wellness, we believe the answer lies in combining the following three factors:

DENSITY + PROXIMITY + DIVERSITY

Density is the number of people/amenities per km2.

Proximity is the rating of the distance from each home to each amenity.

Diversity should be of different types: demographic, enterprise, housing, cultural venues, recreational opportunities, etc.

And the challenge that arises from this formula is the following:

How can we design new urban systems that allow districts to realize the positives of an increase in density vibrancy, more restaurants, jobs, GDP, patents, etc. -without the negatives usually associated with density -congestion, pollution, crowding, loss of contact with nature, crime, disease, etc.-?

New urban systems.

A new generation of disruptive urban systems needs to be created in order to,

not optimize, but reinvent the cities where most of the world population will live in the following years. This means rethinking the strategies to move around, the way we generate and distribute our energy, the methods we use to produce our food, the tools for urban planning, and of course, the focus of this thesis, the way we design and create our urban architectural spaces.

1.2. THE CHALLENGE OF URBAN SPACE

The status quo.

Think about the urban spaces that surround us. Our homes, workplaces, restaurants, schools, hospitals.

hotels,

Now think about how architects, designers, even ourselves, commonly define and lay out the spaces where we experience the day to day.

We take an empty space and we think about functions, activities that will happen in that space. Designers assign specific functions to discrete spaces, resulting in bedrooms, living rooms, dining rooms, conference rooms, examination rooms, etc., and most spaces are unused most of the time.

F1F

Fl

%Ttt)L-SIA

I7

"p

Brom

Beroo

houe foo plns oLiwvinger samm strategyw discu sed u a bcuv Thy ay ot

l~llbedroom

homewitha fuctioalVt-basdddiisio of pace

Supisn tugitmysmhebgstDiffn ebtenteepasi h

fact hat tey ar 2000yearsapart Halfoo hm are d conmpoay( ndCh

-6 (trArm)

[ j j

Figurte 2RSamplearctmectu floor( and Da [6]be n

Forintae, even woqith sigtl

iffere

szsadfr

atralteesml

husens floo plafolthe very sraestrtgicse

bv.Te

a u

DSpising

toug itrmar seems

the biges

diffencedi btntheeprolans iste

doing

the saefoduiesoetie

Modern architecture and engineering have many examples of lessons learned

from ancient methodologies. When it comes to architectural spaces and urban living, the problem is that Romans did not have the challenges we face today. The planet is undergoing a period of extreme urbanization. In October 2011 world population hit 7 billion and, for the first time in history, more than 50% of the people live in cities [7]. Cities in the 21st century will account for nearly 90% of global population growth, 80% of wealth creation, and 60% of total energy

stock". In China and India, it is estimated that 600 million rural people will migrate to cities over the next 15 years, requiring new urban apartments equivalent to double the current number of homes in the US [10].

If urban population is growing at such an incredible rate and infrastructure supply

and demand are overwhelmingly unbalanced, there is no other solution than to start thinking about how we can make a more efficient use of our resources. One of the key resources is undoubtedly space and it is extremely difficult to transition to a new era of space efficiency when we continue to conceive space the same way we did hundreds of years ago. The old space design paradigm works well when you have plenty of space to work with, but fails dramatically when large populations must be housed in increasingly expensive urban areas. The traditional approach to creating living and working space is extremely wasteful of

valuable resources.

If we are driving towards a highly urbanized world, in which cities are the center

of economic, social, cultural vibrancy and the source of most innovation and wealth creation, one of the greatest challenges of our era is to make this urban living sustainable. It is a societal imperative to develop a more rational and efficient approach to living and working space.

An indicator of an unmet need: housing for young professionals.

The tremendous challenge we are facing can be better understood with an example of a currently unmet need.

In cities where entrepreneurship is thriving, from New York to London to Shanghai, housing is increasingly expensive. Market rate real estate development primarily focuses on luxury housing, and rarely addresses the needs of young professionals, students, families, and seniors. Recent articles capture this trend:

"Millennial generation as a whole prefers to live where housing is expensive and where building is difficult .... For the average young professional - not a strategy consultant at a big consulting firm or a tech worker at Sillicon Valley - this is impossible," Fortune, 2015.

"Meet the endangered species of the downtown Boston real estate market: The millennial buyer," Boston.com, 2014.

"Raking It In and Still Priced Out. Young professionals in Manhattan are finding it increasingly difficult to find apartments, even for those with steady incomes," Nypress.com, 2014.

"Most Middle-Class, Millennial Homebuyers Priced Out of Bay Area," Pacific Union, Bay Area Real Estate Blog, 2014.

"Priced out of the capital city: London is losing its lustre for younger people," The Guardian, 2014.

"Sydney housing prices lock out young people from property market. We are creating a city for millionaires." Sidney Morning Herald, 2014.

"China's new cool thing: getting priced out of the housing market", Foreign Policy Magazine, 2015.

"Bay Area will face a further shortage of 29,000 units by 2025, leaving the region's teachers, firefighters, nurses, and other workers vital to the regional economy priced out," Urban Land Institute Report, 2009.

"Young, single... and priced out of buying a home in almost ALL of the country," Daily Mail UK, 2013.

"Is your relationship status pricing you out of the housing market? Single first-time buyers on an average salary are badly affected when it comes to buying a property," The Guardian, 2014.

"Up in Years and All but Priced Out of New York," New York

Times, 2014.

In particular, the "creative class" is being priced out of the market and forced to commute long distances, live in cramped and often shared spaces, or relocate. The case of young professionals and entrepreneurs is especially alarming, as we are pricing out of our cities the very people these places need to remain globally competitive in an interconnected world. As a consequence, Mayors worldwide are seeking solutions [11] that allow their cities to provide high-quality, diverse, affordable housing in order to remain competitive (see also "Housing a Changing City: Boston 2030," an initiative to create workforce housing by Mayor Marty Walsh).

A new housing model is needed to respond directly to the changing needs and

values of young urban professionals, who increasingly consider housing a service and the home as the center of work, entertainment, health care, communication, and commerce [12]. There is a tremendous opportunity to create living environments that provide rich experiences for the occupants, who are willing to trade space (not experience or functionality) for an opportunity to live, work, and play in a walkable, vibrant central location.

Old solutions don't solve new problems.

Micro units are a good case study to understand the need for new architectural solutions.

Multi-family real estate developers are experimenting with tiny apartments to meet this significant unmet need. The Daily Real Estate News recently published

an article entitled "Micro-Apartments Becoming the New Rage," stating that apartments that "range between 180 and 300 square feet are growing in

popularity among young professionals, singles, and even some retirees and empty-nesters ... developers are creating efficient designs to maximize every square inch" [13]. Innovative developers are finding that well-designed very small apartments can be more profitable: more units can be included in a development, lease prices are higher per square foot, and vacancy rates are often lower than conventional apartments [14]. While occupants of micro-units appreciate the lower price, there is general dissatisfaction with the lack of storage, tiny kitchens and baths, and limited social, dining, and working space. The Urban Land Institute Report "The Macro View on Micro Units" (2015) highlights the following:

"Results from the survey of potential micro-unit renters currently living in conventional units revealed that the majority of respondents (58 percent) were probably or definitely not interested in renting micro units, with 18 percent unsure and 24 percent probably or definitely interested. Those uninterested in a micro unit most frequently cited lack of a separate bedroom (75 percent), less storage space (63 percent), and less living or dining space (60 percent) as the reasons for their disinterest."

All of these insights are a consequence of applying old space paradigms to try to

solve the new problems we face today.

Opportunities.

Urban space is too valuable to be static and unresponsive. On account of old

space design approaches, we are under the false impression that we require

space could act as if it was much bigger if we find a new way of integrating technology into our built environment.

There is an opportunity to make our spaces and architectural elements

... multifunctional, in order to create a big space out of a small space with the integration of mechanics and electronics.

... responsive, in order to create a big experience out of a small space with the integration of electronics and software.

A new way of creating spaces - micro units, family housing, retail, hospitality,

offices, etc. - will allow a more sustainable way for our cities to grow.

In the following chapter we will evaluate current transformable solutions and technology integration ideas and why they are not enough.

1.3. ROADMAP TO THESIS

The subsequent chapters follow a logical order:

Chapter 2 reviews the prior art related to ways architecture and technology have

envisioned the spaces of the future and helps understand why there is a need for new solutions.

Chapter 3 presents the basis for a new robotic genre called Architectural

Robotics. The core technology principles are explained, while using prototypes to show how this new approach was conceived.

Chapter 4 introduces ARkits, a robotic platform that gives a form factor to

Architectural Robotics in order to allow its deployment at scale.

Chapter 5 is a design exercise that highlights the potential of creating spaces

CHAPTER 2

DESIGNING SPACES OF THE FUTURE THE OLD WAY

The idea of integrating transformation and technology into architectural spaces is not new at all. This chapter summarizes the prior art and explains why such strategies alone are not sufficient for effectively tackling the challenge of urban

space.

This chapter is divided into the two existing approaches:

- The design and architecture approach

- The technology approach

Part of the problem of the prior art arises from this very same differentiation. The fact that we are looking at the spaces where we live and work from two different angles, and not holistically, creates visions that could not be further apart. At the moment, the "design-architecture home of the future" and the "technology home of the future" are two unconnected worlds.

2.1. DESIGN, ARCHITECTURE AND THE HOME OF THE FUTURE

Design and architecture have traditionally looked at how we can make the most of a space and increase its functionality.

Static furniture and efficiency layouts.

The simplest approach is to take conventional furniture and architectural elements and lay them out in the most efficient way possible, as in figure 4 and 5.

OK,

WHAT'S

A MICRO-UNIT?

IRNSTAOWE

IN(RE11VIN A HOMf FOR YOUR SlI

REMIBE STOW6

MODERN BATH OPN (11 1PA I IOWl)

WHSfAUt FOR PIRSOMMUEiOSlTA 1AI

f HA-MAA8 tSEAT /S AGE . MAXA04 YO 5Alet 1i POLISMED (ONM(EE KlICHETiE SW !%09Iq 10P (Of WINDOWS WRAP-AROUND COUNTER BED ALCOVE

300.4

Figure 5: lkea's showroom as another example of the same approach (photo from inhabitat.com) [16]

Of course, there are limits to what you can do using static furniture. If you want all

the possible functionalities to be present at any given time, then you need to minimize the footprint of each of them. In the case of a studio for example, your bedroom will have an area allocated to your living room, another area to your office and so on. Having all functionalities present at the same time creates unnecessary compromises, as those activities will rarely happen all at the same time.

Classic manual transformables.

The first significant experiment with transformable, multi-functional residential space was the Rietveld Schroder House of 1924 in Utrecht, where the upper floor could be open or subdivided through a system of sliding and revolving panels

I

I..

~1

)

i-il'

JILl

r

V [

I_~~'~~

I

ii.4:.~I

JE~LL

-~m4J

Figure 6: Plan of the Rietveld Schroder House [17]

Since then, hundreds of examples of transformable spaces have been prototyped, but most are expensive, one-off proposals that do not scale to commercial real estate development.

Architect Gary Chang (Hong Kong) did a contemporary version of the ultimate reconfigurable apartment, creating a room that could be converted into 24 different configurations, as shown in figure 8.

rl-~1

I

*1

I

igure 7: Gary Chang's apartment [18]

~-Space-saving furniture such as Murphy beds and sofa beds have become popular for occasional use. At the high end, manually transforming furniture produced by the Italian company Clei Sr (marketed by Resource Furniture) have been popular in demonstration small apartments, as shown in figure below.

Figure 9: Life Edited Apartment in New York with Resource Furniture (photo courtesy of LifeEdited) [19]

Most of these small spaces require a manual reconfiguration multiple times during the day: beds must be folded down to sleep and tables must be extended to dine. Such operations are fine for occasional use, but are annoying and often unacceptable in daily use because of the time, effort, and cognitive load required to shift between activities.

Dak Kopec, director of design for human health at Boston Architectural College and author of Environmental Psychology for Design, highlights the following challenge for architectural elements requiring an easy but not effortless -transformation ritual:

"For all of us, daily life is a sequence of events. But most people don't like adding extra steps to everyday tasks. Because micro-apartments are too small to hold basic furniture like a bed, table,

and couch at the same time, residents must reconfigure their quarters throughout the day: folding down a Murphy bed, or hanging up a dining table on the wall. What might seem novel at the beginning ends up including a lot of little inconveniences, just to go to sleep or make breakfast before work. In this case, residents might eventually stop folding up their furniture every day and the space will start feeling even more constrained. " [20]

New manual transformables.

There is a new generation of manual transformables that tries to answer some of

the challenges presented by their older counterparts. These are elements that

use mechanics in a way that makes things move effortlessly. Two examples are:

Counterweighted beds:

Figure 10: Bedaway bed showcasing a counterweighted bed (photo courtesy of Bedaway) [21]

Figure 11: Bruynzeel office solutions showcasing a moving wall system (photo courtesy of Bruynzeel) [22]

The challenges with this type of solutions are the following:

1) The price of leverage: in order to allow a person to have enough

mechanical advantage to move a heavy object effortlessly in a manual fashion, complex mechanical transmission systems or counterweights need to be integrated.

2) Scalability: all of these mechanical solutions are designed with one application in mind. With these methods, every type of furniture typically requires a unique mechanical strategy. For example, the Bedaway system can not be easily adapted to move the library wall effortlessly. Also, systems like moving walls are not standalone, and need additional complex infrastructure such as tracks and raised floors.

3) Limitation on intelligence: all of these solutions make no allowance for

functionality improvement. Even the electric versions of the moving walls are closed systems. Although Artificial Intelligence for robotics is constantly evolving (see trend around autonomous cars), existing systems for architecture cannot integrate new sensing & algorithms that could allow for autonomous reconfiguration or advanced control. They can move, but

they will remain deaf & mute: they will not be able to tell the rest of the apartment and smart devices that they have moved, and when Al is more developed, they will not have the ability to learn and adapt.

One-off mechatronic systems.

Engineers and architects are also experimenting with mechatronic solutions combining mechanical solutions and some simple electronic interfaces such as

wall buttons.

Figure 12: YoHome apartment, UK, showcasing a mechatronic bed (photo courtesy of YoHome) [23]

These solutions have the same exact problem as some of the previously shown

architectural one-off installations. They work well for a concept prototype, but they are not scalable. From an installation perspective, the mechanisms have very specific construction and integration constraints that limit these solutions to only new built environments - or force very extensive renovations. It is unlikely

that these solutions would ever be cost effective as they are heavily based on complex heavy-duty mechanical strategies (Moore's law does not apply). The cost of these strategies makes these solutions only affordable for the very people

Figure 13: Liftbed commercial bed installed with heavy-duty mechanical columns (photo courtesy of LiftBed) [24]

2.2. TECHNOLOGY AND THE HOME OF THE FUTURE

Smart homes.

The Home of the Future has historically been a recurring trend for technology

enthusiasts. One of the classic home of the future concepts dates back to 1957, The Monsanto House of the Future. The house was a showcase of innovations

involving new materials, appliances, moving cabinetry, etc. Since then,

technology companies have struggled to propose truly life changing integral

applications, as they have been handcuffed by the need to use their concept

homes as a showcase for their existing products.

Figure 14: Monsanto House of the Future at Disneyland [25]

All big technology corporations have used their Homes of the Future to show

concepts for smart TV's, digital photo frames, projections, sensing technologies,

role in how we create our spaces. As a result, the corporate concept homes have

lacked compelling value propositions that combine technology with the physical

nature of spaces and architectural elements.

Figure 15: Microsoft Home of the Future [26]

Smart home hubs.

Home automation has also been a trend for quite some time. The idea of

connecting devices and automating processes has attracted many players to this

market, but there are two main reasons why these ideas never really took off and became mainstream:

- Lack of meaningful applications: most applications have been as simple

as putting a control screen on your mobile phone. This may be an interesting added functionality, but not a life changing feature, as many

people will argue that it is easier and more convenient to toggle a switch

on the wall rather than finding your mobile phone in order to switch on the lights.

- The war over protocols: the huge variety of communication protocols -Zwave, Zigbee, Insteon, Wifi, Bluetooth... - and the inability of industry to

adopt one unifying protocol has been one of the biggest challenges,

of devices. (See Shaun Salzberg's work, Changing Places group on HomeMaestro for a more in depth analysis of all the problems with home automation [27]).

In response to the lack of standard protocols, companies are now focusing on a "middle man" approach. This involves the creation of devices that act as translators between smart devices, with the ability to understand and translate multiple communication protocols. It is analogous to a router that acts as an intermediary between the smart device and the cloud. These "smart hubs" have been developed by: Revolv, Wink, SmartThings. A number of large tech companies are shifting towards this approach as highlighted by Samsung's

acquisition of SmartThings for 200 million dollars in 2014 [28].

Figure 16: SmartThings smart hub and app [29]

The Internet of lights, thermostats and alarms.

"The Internet of Things, or loT, is emerging as the next technology mega-trend, with repercussions across the business spectrum. By connecting to the Internet billions of everyday devices ranging from fitness bracelets to industrial equipment -the loT merges -the physical and online worlds, opening up a host of new opportunities and challenges for companies, governments and consumers."

The same report emphasizes the connected home as a mix of smart thermostats, lighting, appliances, HVAC, security, entertainment... This is another indication of how disconnected the world of design and technology is. We are leaving out of the Internet of Things the things that are arguably more important for a space: desks, walls, closets, beds, etc. There is a need to expand the concept of the Internet of Things.

0

AO *

Figure 17: Phillips Hue [31] and Nest Thermostat as examples of smart products [32]

The Internet of "Things that create environments where people live&work".

The Home of the Future should be more than simply adding a layer of technology on top of traditional space design: it demands holistic thinking about a combination of functionality, experience, design and technology.

-CHAPTER 3

ARCHITECTURAL ROBOTICS

Rather than simply referring to conventional space solutions so that they are more efficient, it is time to incorporate architectural elements and furniture that dramatically improve the functionality. But, how do you convert static and unresponsive objects into something transformable and intelligent? Robotics is the answer. Unfortunately, robotics is a discipline of engineering that has been traditionally out of reach for architects and space designers.

What if a new robotic genre was invented to provide the necessary tools for a new generation of spaces? This is Architectural Robotics.

Chapter 3 will describe the key aspects of this new robotic genre and chapter 4 will dive into the creation of the tools that allow its deployment at scale.

Background: Chassis VS Smart Infill

Architectural Robotics is created in the context of a new general framework for creating architectural spaces around us. Back in 2011, MIT Media Lab's Changing Places Group (Kent Larson et al.) [33] proposed a conceptual vision for a model consisting of a standardized building "chassis" and personalized, technology-enabled, transformable "infill." The idea was to integrate new materials, systems, and technologies, to create urban dwellings that function as if they were much larger, minimize resource consumption, and create rich living experiences for their occupants. This model could be applied to urban spaces such as homes, offices, retail, hotels, etc. The two basic components still apply:

located interface connections for power, data, plumbing, HVAC, and data. The construction methodology may vary, depending on local codes and accepted design and construction processes. A building chassis may be constructed from concrete, structural steel, prefabricated volumetric modules, wood frame, or heavy timber. Stacked shipping containers may be used for re-deployable temporary housing.

Infill. The infill consists of highly personalized, technology-enabled elements that can be rapidly configured and installed in a matter of hours at the point of sale or lease. Infill elements connect to the chassis according to simple interface, much the same way a USB device universally connects to a personal computer.

Figure 18: Standard Chassis and Smart Infill (Changing Places Group)

Based on this vision, we try to answer the next fundamental question: what could that infill consist of?

Architectural elements with superpowers.

It is time to embrace a new way to design our spaces, that incorporate furniture

and architectural elements with superpowers.

- What if your furniture could robotically transform?

- What if it could be customized to adapt to different users and spaces?

- What if it was a smart node that communicates with the rest of your space?

- What if these new responsive physical environments were programmable? This chapter is the genesis of Architectural Robotics, a story of the "superpowers" that give shape to this new robotic genre, explained as developed through

3.1. ROBOTIC TRANSFORMATION

"The power to move or be moved as if weightless"

As discussed in the prior art section, spatial transformations that are merely ''easy" are not sufficient: they must be effortless and seemingly magical to be used daily. Walls, beds, desks, screens... translate, navigate, deploy with the aid of motors.

Robotic transformation allows three kinds of space reconfigurations:

- Fully autonomous: Artificial Intelligence allows for automatic

reconfiguration of the space based on, but not limited to, factors such as preferences, user's activity, environmental conditions, and so on.

- User indirect control: mobile apps, voice, gesture and other user interfaces are explored to control the furniture (as shown in subchapter 3.5).

- User direct control: an interim step between manual and automatic. Natural interfaces such as pressure sensitive areas have been explored in order to convert directional pressure user input into directional furniture movement output. The users are able to move heavy objects the same way they open doors or windows. We see the most short term potential on this strategy, as not only keeps a close natural connection between the user and the movement, but also puts the responsibility/liability on the end user, simplifying the need for complex safety features.

1ist generation Robowall - H. Larrea, K. Larson, 2012

The Robowall was the first Architectural Robot developed by the Changing

Places Group and it served as the Master's Thesis in Mechanical Engineering (University Navarra, 2012) for the author of this thesis. The robowall was a wall chassis that:

- could translate around an apartment

- had an open interior architecture to adapt its functionality (see subchapter

3.2.)

2nd generation Robowall - C. Olabarri, H. Larrea, K. Larson, 2013

The second generation of the robowall explored a much more modular mechatronic architecture, and started hinting at the idea that the same mechanical elements could power apparently very different elements like a bed or a sofa. This concept serves as the inspiration for the Robocouch in chapter 4.

A pressure interface - Larrea, Larson, Lark, Liu. Zbode Systems, 2013

What would be more natural than having users push or pull heavy objects the same way they open doors?

The basic idea is to use a drive by wire approach to give the same feeling of the

mechanical advantage provided by systems such as hinges or counterbalances.

A force sensitive resistor reads the pressure, and that force is converted by a

microcontroller into an electrical signal that operates the motors. The result: the more force you put into the direction of the element, the faster the element will move in that same direction. With no force applied, no movement will happen.

Sri qo

3.2. CUSTOMIZATION

"The power to have different form and function"

There is "no one size fits all" in how we want to experience our spaces, so

architectural elements need a way to adapt to different functional requirements. The robotic components not only need to give extraordinary capabilities to furniture, but also need to allow the expression of different designs to be adapted

to different users and spaces.

The same way a person can dress different clothes, robotic components provide

a physical platform for customization, a skeleton that can be completed with endless different possibilities.

Previous prototypes show the evolution of the customization approach:

Home genome project - D. Smithwick, J. Suominen, Kent Larson, 2010

The Home Genome Project profiles of the users and the

presented an approach based on understanding the geometric constraints of the space.

Figure 22: Home Genome Project showing a user profile translated into a spatial configuration (Dan Smithwick - left, Kent Larson -right)[34]

avow% M, .0w

'Wr IRV, -,9W -,qw IWI

A recommendation engine would use different static building blocks to create an

apartment layout based on the user's preferences.

14

Figure 23: Home Genome Project building blocks showing configuration possibilities (rendering by Carla Farina) [34]

Dynamic building blocks - H. Larrea, K. Larson, W. Lark, LY. Liu, 2013

Instead of marrying to one specific configuration, dynamic building blocks allow many different configurations within the same space.

Building blocks can have different functions, sizes and materials. Three examples of variations tested out:

- A moving closet based on a commercial modular system

Figure 24: Dynamic function blocks as prototyped with a closet, bed and table (photos courtesy of Zbode Systems)

Mechatronics skeleton and personalized design on top.

The conclusion is that if architectural elements can provide different configurations, the customization process shifts from choosing from a set of static building blocks to choosing the preferred transformations that will bring the most benefit to each user and space. Then the user chooses the content - function, materials, etc. - of each dynamic building block to adapt to his/her needs.

Let's use a version of the robowall as an example. The static building blocks are part of a personalized design on top of a mechatronic plinth:

A

Figure 25: Furniture personalization approach where a user profile is translated into a furniture design (Profile images by D. Smithwick, furniture study by P. Ewing)

3.3. SMART HUB

"The power to communicate"

Architectural elements are part of the Internet of Things, they are connected to the Internet. This means they can talk and listen, send and receive information. But architectural elements have the potential of not just being another node in the connected devices scheme, but acting as a hub - understanding a hub as an element that allows other devices or peripherals to get connected to the Internet as well.

The approach is based on the fact that the electronic intelligence used to control motors for robotic transformation can also be used to:

* connect the transformable element itself to the Internet

- connect any other device mounted on the furniture to the Internet. These may be input devices such as sensors, cameras, etc., or output devices such as lighting, secondary motors, etc.

The vision of the furniture as a connected node is the natural evolution of the research by the Changing Places Group at the MIT Media Lab.

Place Lab - J. Nawyn, K. Larson, S. Intille, 2004-2008

Current Changing Places research builds on years of research that took place at the MIT PlaceLab, operated from 2004 to 2008. The PlaceLab was developed as an apartment-scale shared research facility where new technologies and design concepts could be tested and evaluated in the context of everyday living. It is recognized as one of the very first instrumented "living laboratories," and is considered one of the most highly instrumented living environments ever built. The 1000-square-foot space integrated hundreds of sensors, allowing researchers to study nearly every aspect of life in the home. PlaceLab experiments included a focus on proactive health, user interface, indoor air quality, energy conservation, diet, disease management, and accident prevention.

Figure 26: PlaceLab instrumented apartment (photo by Kent Larson)

air quality sensors

IR illuminators

hinged panels to sensor bus

-cabinet door switches countertop activity cameras

refrigerator use sensors

microwave use sensors

oven & range use sensors

cabinet drawer sensors hot water use cold water use sensor-hinged panels to sensor bus

cabinet door switches

sensor network

connections-intemet connections

-temperature sensors

wer integrated into cabinetry

inged panels to subwoofers

Figure 27: PlaceLab's custom cabinetry integrating sensors (photo by Kent Larson)

The place lab was a one-off instrumented space and that limited its scalability.

Box Lab - J. Nawyn, K. Larson, S. Intille, 2008

In order to make the sensing infrastructure more scalable and easier to deploy in existing and new built environments, in 2008, the Changing Places group introduced BoxLab, a portable, modular sensing platform offering most of the capabilities provided by the PlaceLab, but miniaturized to fit in a wooden box the size of a small end table. As a remotely deployable plug-and-play version of the PlaceLab, BoxLab enabled researchers to install a rich sensing network into any residence or workplace with willing participants. The BoxLab, with a variety of physical housings, included infrared occupancy sensors, wide angle color video cameras, microphones for audio capture, interfaces for mobile phone charging and synching, receivers for wireless RFID and accelerometer object sensors, temperature and humidity sensing, indoor positioning via RF tagging, speakers for audio output, a CPU for real-time data processing, and disks for data storage.

* Infrared occupancy sensors

*Wide-angle color video camera *Amplified microphones

Docking for mobile devices

-Control for sensor applications -SenseCam for 1st person views *Wireless object sensor receiver

*RFID receiver

- Wireless data network

- GPRS remote monitoring * Temperature/humidity sensors

' Audio output (speakers)

- Internal data storage

One of the original motivations behind the BoxLab was to solve the problem of requiring study participants to move into an unfamiliar environment, but more connected to this thesis' topic, the BoxLab provided a form factor that aimed at the idea that physical objects in the space could be smart hubs that gather

information and communicate with the rest of the space.

2

El

L~IIz

3 \(\9

r~E

Figure 29: BoxLab kiosks deployed in a conventional home. Numbers show locations. (photo & design by J. Nawyn) [35]

Furniture Lab - H. Larrea, C. Rubio, J. Nawyn, K. Larson, 2015

With the miniaturization of electronics and microprocessors, the next step on this evolution is that the spatial elements around us have the ability to integrate input-output devices at will. It is a very logical step, as the input and input-output devices and sensors have to be mounted somewhere, and, most of the time, they end up being mounted in the physical elements that make our environment. So, what if we could take advantage of the intelligence on these architectural elements and use it to not only power, but also give communication capabilities to all those systems?

The BoxLab is not a box anymore, it could be a bed, a table, a closet, a dividing

wall, etc. Sensors, lights, cameras, become peripherals of our spatial elements. It

is the Furniture Lab.

AU V

3

0

I-5

C

6

LIZZE

Figure 30: From the BoxLab to the FurnitureLab; how the intelligence could move from "boxes" to furniture (Image courtesy of Changing Places)

1

U

3.4. PROGRAMMABILITY

"The power to think"

The moment smart devices and physical objects are connected to the Internet, the moment the possibility for programming your environment is unleashed. Programming is the natural evolution of home automation. As Mckinsey's report on the Internet of Things states [36] the first phases of home automation are providing the user simple ways of monitoring and controlling the environment. After that we can start thinking about more complex environments that track our behavior and react to it, enhance your situation awareness, new interfaces, big data analytics driven by sensor data, and a long etc.

Your home, your office, your hotel, will eventually turn into an app ecosystem. The same way smart phones allow new functionalities to be generated every day

and create a platform for customizing user experience, homes will also be a

platform for user experience customization. The home of the future will be an open-ended system; the home of the future will be a platform.

Figure 31: Smart phone app ecosysystem symbolic visualization (Image from desk.com) [37]

Application example: home interface mock up - H. Larrea, J. Bonsen, 2014

A quick prototype was built in order to unlock the potential of a programming

environment through an example of an app for the home. We focused on the idea

that all current home automation based systems are still in the first phases of

home automation, as explained in Mckinsey's report [36]. Controlling and monitoring your smart devices through a mobile phone interface has become the standard of home automation. But, if there is a programming environment for our

home, any interface is possible.

The mock up in Figure 32 expressed the idea that you could point at things and control their behavior. Point at a light and change the color and intensity, point at a wall or a blind system and move it, etc. A LeapMotion camera [38] was used to track the fingers and servos & led's to control the apartment.

This is just an example of playing with the smart devices in your home (cameras, sensors, led, lights, etc.) in order to create apps that may add different functionalities to the home.

3.5. CASE STUDY: CITYHOME 200 SQ. FT. PROTOTYPE

The CityHome was a 200 sq. ft. concept apartment built at the MIT Media Lab in April 2014. The lead team was composed of Kent Larson (Principal Investigator, Changing Places Group), Hasier Larrea (MAS '15, Changing Places group); Daniel Goodman (MAS '15, Changing Places group); Oier Ariho (visiting student, Changing Places group); Phillip Ewing (SMArchS '15, Design and Computation group). In addition, the following undergraduate students contributed as urops that Spring 2014 semester: Carlos Rubio, Matthew Daiter, Kelly McGee, Hyunjoon Song, Hannah Ahlblad, Kabir Abiose, States Lee.

The CityHome's main purpose was to test out our theory that:

"Robotics can make space act like if it was two or three times bigger" So we decided to face the challenge of the priced out young professionals being either kicked out of the city centers or pushed to live in tiny conventional micro units. We chose 200 sq ft as a worst case scenario, as it is far below the standard for micro units nowadays (around 300 sq. ft.). The question was: can we make 200 sqft not only livable, but also desirable?

We integrated the four "superpowers" (sections 3.1 through 3.4) in a prototype in order to dramatically increase the functionality and the experience of the space.

Space functionality and experience.

200 sq. ft. may seem very small, but the perception changes if you have 200 sq. ft. of a bedroom, 200 sq. ft. of a dining room, 200 sq. ft. of an office or 200 sq. ft. of a living room. The challenge was to incorporate the following into a 200 sq. ft. apartment: queen size bed, 6 feet of a work desk, dining for 6 people, living space for 8 people, handicapped accessible bathroom, 6 linear feet of closet space and a fully functional kitchen

I-Ill-I-

p

I

-

I-Ill-I-~T

K

[

1]

B

L

I

I

Figure 34: CityHome dining configuration (photo MIT Media Lab)

Oft

.9

I-Ill-I-7

~11

VP

I

2

K

rv

I

Figure 36: CityHome bedroom configuration (photo MIT Media Lab)

I-i

I~III~I

B

...

-..

I

The center volume is the main furniture piece of the space and it is a good example of furniture with superpowers.

It robotically transforms providing various functionalities with a compact form factor.

Figure 38: Disentangled robotic furniture piece shown in the 200 sq. ft. layout (rendering by P. Ewing)

It is customizable to adapt to different users or spaces. It is also disentangled from the building, so that it allows an easier implementation in retrofit scenarios.

Il

Different connected smart devices around the home showcased the smart hub capabilities and the programmability of the system. Different interfaces were used to connect the different devices in the home - lights, blinds, projectors, etc.

Figure 41: Pressure sensors to control transformation integrated into furniture (photo by MIT